This is a review *template*. Besides handling the [ ]-marked tests you are also supposed to fix the template before pasting into bugzilla: - Add issues you find to the list of issues on top. If there isn't such a list, create one. - Add your own remarks to the template checks. - Add new lines marked [!] or [?] when you discover new things not listed by fedora-review. - Change or remove any text in the template which is plain wrong. In this case you could also file a bug against fedora-review - Remove the "[ ] Manual check required", you will not have any such lines in what you paste. - Remove attachments which you deem not really useful (the rpmlint ones are mandatory, though) - Remove this text Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on javapackages-tools (jpackage-utils) - Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage Note: No javadoc subpackage present. Note: Javadocs are optional for Fedora versions >= 21 See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Javadoc_installation - Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink) Note: No javadoc subpackage present See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Javadoc_installation - Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build Note: Jar files in source (see attachment) See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Java/#_pre_built_dependencies ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [ ]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [ ]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 58 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/lib/copr- rpmbuild/results/puppetserver/licensecheck.txt [ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /etc/puppetserver, /usr/share, /etc/puppetserver/services.d, /usr/share/doc/puppetserver, /usr/share/puppetserver, /etc/puppetserver/conf.d, /etc, /usr/share/doc, /usr/lib, /usr/libexec/puppetserver, /usr/lib/systemd/system, /usr/bin, /var, /var/lib, /usr/lib/sysusers.d, /usr, /usr/lib/systemd, /usr/libexec, /usr/share/puppetserver/services.d [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/puppetserver, /usr/share, /etc/puppetserver/services.d, /usr/share/doc/puppetserver, /usr/share/puppetserver, /etc/puppetserver/conf.d, /etc, /usr/share/doc, /usr/lib, /usr/libexec/puppetserver, /usr/lib/systemd/system, /usr/bin, /var, /var/lib, /usr/lib/sysusers.d, /usr, /usr/lib/systemd, /usr/libexec, /usr/share/puppetserver/services.d [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [ ]: Changelog in prescribed format. [ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package [ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [ ]: Package does not generate any conflict. [ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 13709 bytes in 1 files. [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: No %config files under /usr. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files. Note: Systemd service file(s) in puppetserver [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Maven: [ ]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even when building with ant [x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [!]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [ ]: Package functions as described. [ ]: Latest version is packaged. [ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [ ]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [ ]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: Sources 3, 4 and 5 are not passed to gpgverify. [ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Java: [ ]: Package uses upstream build method (ant/maven/etc.) [x]: Packages are noarch unless they use JNI ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. Rpmlint ------- Checking: puppetserver-8.6.2-1.fc41.noarch.rpm puppetserver-8.6.2-1.fc41.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp36vhcmim')] checks: 32, packages: 2 puppetserver.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/puppetserver/ca 750 puppetserver.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/puppetserver 750 puppetserver.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary puppetserver puppetserver.spec: W: no-%build-section puppetserver.noarch: W: description-shorter-than-summary puppetserver.src: W: description-shorter-than-summary 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 4 warnings, 7 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 3.5 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: there is no installed rpm "puppetserver". There are no files to process nor additional arguments. Nothing to do, aborting. ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 1 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://downloads.puppetlabs.com/puppet/puppetserver-8.6.2.tar.gz.asc : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d0e360aa2c9053fd8dcc72bb72d25954133ef253292607890d4b32bad7a06f5b CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d0e360aa2c9053fd8dcc72bb72d25954133ef253292607890d4b32bad7a06f5b https://downloads.puppetlabs.com/puppet/puppetserver-8.6.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 8784a05bf0f1fee0b0548718b7a396d0d39b3d9522af579d5f7b04d339d0c55e CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8784a05bf0f1fee0b0548718b7a396d0d39b3d9522af579d5f7b04d339d0c55e Requires -------- puppetserver (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/bash /usr/bin/sh config(puppetserver) jre-17-headless puppet rubygem(puppetserver-ca) shadow-utils Provides -------- puppetserver: config(puppetserver) group(puppet) puppetserver user(puppet) Jar and class files in source ----------------------------- ./puppetserver-8.6.2-build/puppetserver-8.6.2/puppet-server-release.jar Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name puppetserver --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Java, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Perl, Python, C/C++, PHP, SugarActivity, R, Haskell, Ocaml, fonts Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH